Nikannis Co. v. City of Duluth
121 N.W. 212, 108 Minn. 83, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 636
Opinion
Appeal from an order for judgment, and also from an order refusing to grant a motion to amend the findings of fact and conclusions of law. An order for judgment is not appealable. Ryan v. Kranz, 25 Minn. 362; Croft v. Miller, 26 Minn. 317, 4 N. W. 45; St. Anthony Falls Bank v. Graham, 67 Minn. 318, 69 N. W. 1077.
An order denying a motion to amend the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law is not appealable. Lamprey v. St. Paul & Chicago Ry. Co., 86 Minn. 509, 515, 91 N. W. 29, and cases cited.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Nikannis Co. v. City of Duluth, 121 N.W. 212, 108 Minn. 83, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 636 (Mich. 1909).
121 N.W. 212 (Nikannis Co. v. City of Duluth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cucchiarella v. Kolodzieg
166 N.W.2d 100 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1969)
Rieke v. St. Albans Land Co.
229 N.W. 557 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1930)
Carlson v. Stafford
208 N.W. 413 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1926)
Taylor v. Chicago Great Western Railroad
203 N.W. 434 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1925)
Rees v. Nash
171 N.W. 781 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1919)
Desaman v. Butler Bros.
136 N.W. 747 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1912)